She said children, the elderly and people with breathing problems, including asthma, are the first to feel the effects of smoke and particle pollution which means they need to take extra care.

“Asthma is a serious condition and if not managed properly, particularly in the current circumstances, can be life threatening,’’ Ms Beswick said.

Where possible, asthma suffers should:

- Stay indoors and keep windows and doors closed;
- Minimise the amount of physical outdoor activity;
- If using an air conditioner or heat pump at home or in the car, set it to recycle;
- Try to minimise exposure to other irritants such as cigarette smoke and dust; and,
- Make sure their blue/grey reliever medication is at hand.

If in any doubt about these precautions you can contact the Asthma Foundation of Tasmania on 1800 645 130.

If, however, it is an emergency situation or if you find breathing uncharacteristically difficult - call 000 immediately.

Picture: One of three smoke plumes on the horizon across the Huon from Wattle Grove on the afternoon of March 31, 2010. Pic: Bob Hawkins

Show Comments

Comments (32)

Once again the taxpaying community must wear the costs of forestry’s wasteful practices.

Posted by Mike Bolan on 01/04/10 at 01:28 PM

When is someone going to get a class action up against Forestry Tasmania for shortening our lives? I’ve been coughing and wheezing for two days even though I feel sure my lungs, basically, are in good nick. So how miserable is life being made for those poor buggers who already have chronic lung conditions?
—Bob Hawkins

Posted by bob hawkins on 01/04/10 at 01:47 PM

The smoke on Hobart’s eastern shore the other day, courtesy of CCC, must be a different type of smoke. No complaints when Mornington was choking ?

Posted by Sam on 01/04/10 at 05:26 PM

Do you remember when in the dying days of Indonesia’s rule, they set East Timor alight? These are the militia, the Tasmanian militia. That’s how we view them. In the inter-regnum, make smoke while the sun shines.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 01/04/10 at 05:48 PM

It is heartening to see activities that reduce the risk of a black Saturday, or even the ‘67 fires of Tas.

Posted by Mark Wybourne on 01/04/10 at 06:25 PM

Yesterday there was a large fire out towards Frankford. The smoke generated stayed low and drifted all the way to Quamby Bluff. It made a great looking sunset but unfortunately the smoke was also pretty smelly at Westbury.
Nice to know that the election is over and now the burns can resume in full.
Keep up the great work Forestry soon we will have a lovely island covered in nice neat rows of similar sized trees.

Posted by Pete Godfrey on 01/04/10 at 06:48 PM

I am currently in Singapore the rumor here is that the smoke haze is not from third world Forestry practices in Indonesia but has come all the way from Tasmania, oops, sorry Victoria?

Posted by john hawkins on 01/04/10 at 08:02 PM

The new shared Greens/Liberal government will we expect, gradually bring the management team of Forestry Tasmania to account for their long term stealth riddled insidious forestry practices.

This current Tasmanian GEB will not be given that blind support, that covert blind-eye to non-regulatory practices, nor will these practices be any longer tolerated as to the thuggery that has now become an icon of Forestry Tasmania and its forestry forces.
The time has arrived to halt the enormously destructive practices that account for so much of Tasmania’s wasted forest resources.
So large has that volume been of our indigenous forestry timber species, it would now be incalculable today.(yet those instances of volumes and occurence, are known only by those whom elected and or allowed such practices to destroy so very much.)

Were there figures available of the enormous tonnage volumes of diverse timber species, (those species that have not suited the wood-chipping demands of Gunns Ltd,) that have been put to the torch, then there would be enormous outrages by all those sectors of Federal government, that are still accepting the questionable forestry industry advices as given by such as the management teams of Gunns Ltd and Forestry Tasmania.

Why we ask has the continuation of such wastage of timber resources been ignored, when we were led to believe otherwise?
Yet these wastage volumes were supposedly known to the State government, when they gamely approved the cloaking-over of the forestry practices of both Gunns Ltd and Forestry Tasmania.

This insane madness cannot be allowed to continue.

A letter referencing the above has been forwarded to the DAFF Federal minister, in the hope that this may put a stop to such foolish waste of Tasmania’s potentially profitable timber products.

Posted by William Boeder on 01/04/10 at 08:20 PM

#5: Forest regeneration burns have nothing to do with reducing the risk of catastrophic bush fires.
In fact, there is evidence that the monocultures produced after forest regen. burns produce a greater risk of uncontrolled wildfire.

Posted by Snowy on 01/04/10 at 09:05 PM

Mark Wybourne, were these fuel reduction burns? or were these forestry waste burns? you must know as you are espousing opinion consistent with the former not the later. pls do tell

#5 Mark you know as well as I do there is a much greater chance of a massive wild fire occuring in Tasmania under the present forest industries plantation practices. Containment lines are being breached regularly. Not to mention the dirty stinking smoke that comes from their needless residue burning practices.

Posted by Clive Stott on 02/04/10 at 01:23 AM

Clive

Current plantation practice is not to burn, except in those few instances for private property protection, or the neighbour demands it.

You need to acquaint yourself with what is actually happening out there instead of making half baked accusations.

Posted by Mark Wybourne on 02/04/10 at 10:52 AM

There is absolutely no reason in this modern computer age that Forestry Tasmania should not have on overlay of their fires linked to google earth. Even on their own ‘Planned Burns’ map each fire should have a linked ‘pop-up’ page with name the coupe, it’s size, when lit etc.

In addition all fires in the state should be linked to one easily accessible web site. It’s pretty frightening seeing and smelling smoke and having no idea where it’s coming from and whether it is deliberate forestry fire, a burn off, a bush fire which may not have been reported.

It’s rather interesting that the Forestry fires that smoked out the N/NE just prior to the election, all in the name of creating a hot seed bed for regeneration, were not expected to be seed sown until this week just gone. A number of these coupes had been clearfelled, according to FT’s own ‘3 year coupe plans, anywhere from 2 - 4 years ago, and no doubt would have already started significant regeneration on their own. But it’s the euc’s they want to propagate and flourish, not useless understorey trees and lowlife native plants eh!

Posted by Charles and Claire Gilmour on 02/04/10 at 11:23 AM

How much longer can this sinister band of bully-boys continue to ignore all those rules set upon the rest of us in our communities?
There can be no legitimate carte blanche given to so freely allow the imperious disdain as held by Forestry Tasmania, toward the duty of care, as is so set in place upon the rest of Tasmania.
It is truly a government display of false covert and sinister deceit thrust upon the people of Tasmania.

Perhaps our recently toppled ‘minister of all and sundry botherations, Mr David Llewellyn MP may shed some light upon his supporting role toward such as this anathema?

Posted by William Boeder on 02/04/10 at 02:21 PM

Not so Mark Wybourne,

the plantation next to me in Liffey was recently burnt, after logging. Another case of the difference between ‘Theory’ and ‘Practice’.

What about plans to burn the remains of the recently logged bush at Mt Dismal? Let me guess, that’s so there won’t be a repetition of the 67 Hobart fires?

And you wrote that Clive had made ‘half baked accusations’! Not so, Mark.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 02/04/10 at 03:20 PM

#14 Mark are you in Europe or on Mars?
Where on earth do you get such information as, “Current plantation practice is not to burn, except in those few instances for private property protection, or the neighbour demands it.”
Can you please point me to where it says this here in Tasmania?
Why do you think there are websites updated daily to show where planned burning is taking place?
7.2 million tonnes plus of forestry rubbish was burnt in 2008.
You are ill informed Mark.Is this another one of those cases where; if you don’t know you make it up?
I think the readers would love to hear where you got your information. Please quote the source.

Posted by Clive Stott on 02/04/10 at 09:34 PM

#19 Tigerquoll
I went to the link you provided about woodstoves. This is interesting. I saw the information was about ten years old. Is it a view which has acceptance? How does it fit with the issue of Greenhouse gases and how pro forestry advocates say that burning wood makes no difference overall (I think they do say it in such terms) to the world wide amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 06/04/10 at 03:23 PM

And Mark Wybourne, when Tasmania has a fully grown plantation estate, mixed with residential homes, how do you propose to stop a fire storm fuelled by densely packed trees?

I predict that Black Saturday will be a pale shadow of what is to come in the next decade.
We are trading our wet forests for tightly packed dry ones and we will have the devil to pay in the future.

Posted by Tom Torquemada on 06/04/10 at 07:50 PM

# 21 - you do tend to embellish things a tad. However let’s all pretend that that the current 300,000 hectare plantation estate in Tassie will grow another 3 million hectares, with a few houses in between ... and the there is a fire. Hmmmm well it would be much safer than if it were native forest.

# 18. You are also confused and seem to be summing native forest regen burns with plantation ones. Ummm, there’s a web site as coupes are still burnt perhaps????!! Although I do notice that it is only populated by forestry companies and maybe Parks when they feel like it. May be a good idea for councils to provide the same info perhaps? As for where it says it in Tasmania ... maybe the companies have it ... have you tried communicating politely with them?

# 17. The plantation coupe next to you was burnt! Oh my goodness me! That just proves the point I was making that there are sensible exceptions (and yes I bet, some daft ones as well). As for Dismal, you state bush, does that mean its native going back to native? If so, it’s not plantation.

# 15. Your idea is good but I can’t see it working outside the fire permit system though, as the private landholders would tell teh system to take a running jump, regardless of the low number of high speed rural computers. I find it mildly distrubing that there already is a system where forestry companies highlight their ‘planned’ burns and yet some people just use the information supplied for bagging purposes (why bother trying to be a good corporate citizen when you just get shat on?), or else get confused by it and assume all the ‘planned’ fires loaded are actually burnt, like some geezer did last year.

Re the large gap between harvest and burning, I hope they are facts that you are stating, and not simply chinese whispers.

However, I have to admit that I have heard that the smoke regulation model is making it difficult for the industry to get burns done on time for regeneration, so perhaps you may be right, although 4 years seems incorrect.
Cheers

Posted by Mark Wybourne on 06/04/10 at 10:53 PM

Regarding both #17 & #22. I along with others, live next to the mentioned 600 acre clear fell at Mt Dismal. The logging debris is to be burnt over the next few weeks.
An FEA plantation will replace the native vegetation and trees that existed there previously.

Posted by Tony Saddington on 07/04/10 at 09:36 AM

Mark Wybourne, you started yourself on this thread by trying to spin this burn as a fuel reduction burn yet provide no evidence to support that. again, do you have evidence of this?

Posted by joey on 07/04/10 at 10:13 AM

# 23 Tony. Was that 600 ha native forest? If so, FEA needs to adhere to the policy of other forestry companies and stop converting (this must be why they have lost their AFS certification).

If it was plantation and they still plan to burn all of it, then there harvesting and establishment practices need improving.

Re 24: No idea what you are talking about. However heavy fuels that will not break down quickly should be treated in a manner that reduces risk to the community.

Posted by Mark Wybourne on 07/04/10 at 01:09 PM

Yep Mark. It is apparently still on privately owned land and had small areas of it selectively logged about 12 years ago. Most of it was largely untouched.

I too wonder at the sense in it. It cannot, as I understand, achieve FSC accreditation and FEA, at 4 cents a share, may not exist soon.
I am wondering as to what future value this plantation will have.

A Gunns employee told me that they mistakenly wear the heat for some of the FEA practices.

Posted by Tony Saddington on 07/04/10 at 02:30 PM

No wonder Mark Wybourne is so strong in his belief that Tasmania’s smoke clouds that being send overseas, mostly to New Zealand and beyond in high altitude are from “fuel reduction” wildfire prevention burns, as he is in the Land of the long white cloud…
He has not seen the realities of Tasmania’s “waste disposal” burns from forest conversion to clearfelled - bare land.

In Tasmania mixed and diverse forests (mixed in age and species) get converted through clearfell (big and small, old and young) into even aged, monoculture like Eucalypt tree crops.

And yes as Tony Saddington listed above, there is still plantation establishment going on on ex forest land, not just second rotation monoculture tree crops.

Mark seems to be unaware that Tasmania still has real forests not just plantations and that responsible forest management would be a lot different than age class tree cropping.

Introduction to Mark:
Mark is a qualified forestry professional with over 25 years of extensive industry experience, ranging through practical forestry work, academic study, corporate forest management and farmer/investor forest management and consultancy.

Mark in post #5 you stated, “It is heartening to see activities that reduce the risk of a black Saturday, or even the ‘67 fires of Tas.” (Posted by Mark Wybourne on 01/04/10 at 05:25 PM).

i am asking you for evidence that the aim of this fire was to reduce fuel build-up, or alternatively did it have nothing to do with reducing fuel build-up instead have to do with a clearfelled forestry coupe burn. and thus how does a regeneration burn “reduce the risk of a black Saturday, or even the ‘67 fires of Tas.”?

you know what i am talking about.

Posted by joey on 07/04/10 at 03:49 PM

(22) Ok, ideally, should have said, ‘Current Burns’ map on the Planned Burns web site … should have linked pop-up pages.

Unless Forestry’s ‘3 year wood production plans’ (current and previous) are considered ‘chinese whispers’? For that is what the coupe numbers we were given by FT for the pre-election burns were cross referenced with.

What did Forestry think we wanted to do with the info we requested? Light the BBQ with it? FT know who we are. We appreciate that the info was sent to us, but let’s face it, isn’t that what FT’s Community Liaison people are supposed to do?

‘Why bother trying to be a good corporate citizen?’ It doesn’t matter whether FT can be bothered or not, apparently FT desperately needs to brand their image as such and their public information is ultimately community property.

Let us ask you this … if you came home after work and saw a fire raging near your driveway and home, and even though you had requested on a number of occasions over a couple of years about being informed when the neighbouring coupe was to be burnt, and the only notification you get is a phone message (and a rather rude one at that) left at about lunch time on the day of the fire, whilst you are at work, then on inspection of said fire see no cleared buffer has been put in place on the side closest to your property’s boundary, then have to suffer through the smoke haze sitting in the valley for nearly a week, would you consider that to be a ‘good corporate citizen’?

If the pre-election fire info had already been linked to the ‘current burns’ map … if FT had said,… hey we lit around 197ha of fires on the afternoon of Tuesday the 16th, around the back of Mole Creek area, it may have contributed to the smoke problem the next day …. then at least FT would have been upfront from the start. Instead there seems to have been a deliberate attempt by someone to steer the public just about anywhere but at the FT fires burning in the state at the time.

We wanted to see exactly where the fires had been, so looked at the ‘3 year wood production plans’ and the accompanying coupe maps.

Quoted from FT’s website … “The list of coupes, potentially available for road construction and wood production for the three years of the Plan (2008/09 – 20010/11), are available by selecting a forest district on the DISTRICT MAP above or selecting the district name in the list below. The maps show the indicative location and extent of the intended harvest operations.”

When some of the coupe numbers could not be found on the current 3 year wood production plans, (08/09 – 10/11) we then looked at the previous 3 year wood production plans (05/06 – 07/08), (though the previous 3 year plans had by some miracle divested themselves of the maps … they may well be in that locked battered brief case FT seems to sometimes have difficulty locating the key for….).

Anyway at the risk of being accused of giving FT a Chinese burn! below are the coupe details FT gave us, followed by the coupe details from the 3 year wood production plans.

Why cannot this Mark Wybourne confine his interests and concerns to that of what he is paid to do?

That he writes from lands ‘across the water’ as an agent provocateur for the blighted Tasmanian Forestry Industry Operators, seems to be the reality here, thus this action really does appear to be another slip-shod support mechanism stunt, as so regularly played out by said Forestry Tasmania and of their sympathetic acolytes!

Posted by William Boeder on 07/04/10 at 09:45 PM

# 27. Gee whiz factfinder, you have turned me into a Forester. I mean, there is no way that there would be more than one person with the same name is there. Therefore I must be commenting on forestry practices in Tasmania from another country that I would wager (not that I have done a survey with my fellow country men - sorry beverly) are not even sure where Tasmania exists (or would care).

# 31 William - I never understand what you are talking about, why don’t you try and be more direct.

Re 30: My query was actually how would you see a system working where ALL fire lighters (particularly outside the permit system) have their burn details recorded on an accessible web page.

Re your personal experience, simply not acceptable if what you state is true (I believe you but there are two sides to all stories) but my experience with fires lit by forestry companies in the Tamar has generally been really quite good, so maybe you shouldn’t make a generalisation based on on experience (maybe things have improved over the last couple of years)

Posted by Mark Wybourne on 08/04/10 at 10:12 AM

Mark #32 How long is it since you lived in the Tamar valley? Have you ever lived in the Tamar valley? What spin have you been reading? The more you write the more your credibility goes out the window I am sorry to say.
Besides, have a look at http://www.cleanairtas.com and learn a little about smoke travel. These are not my made up facts like your made up facts, they come from reliable, indisputable sources….do you hear that Mark… reliable, indisputable sources.
You will see that forestry fires lit anywhere in Tasmania can end up having their smoke dumped in the Tamar valley and often do.
Recently, according to the EPA, we had smoke dumped on us from Victoria so doesn’t that tell you something? Yes it tells you what is on the website is correct. Have a read my friend.

Posted by Clive Stott on 09/04/10 at 09:24 PM

#34 Clive. I probably know more about smoke travel than you, and the web site you quote does not give you as much info as the CSMS web site.

Also, I wasn’t talking about smoke to the Gilmours, I was talking about my experience with forestry companies (including FT).

And re the smoke from VIC, you fail to make a point? I mean it is not unusual to get smoke from there.

And I still maintain, even in the midst of your whinging, that this will be one of the quietest planned burn seasons ever - due to facts that you have overlooked like conversion of native forest in finished (except for FEA and I doubt that they will do much this year considering their financial season) and the significant shift away from burning second rotation (plantation in case you are not sure) by the companies, particularly Gunns.

Re smoke in Tamar, there has been bugger all so far this year. I could just smell some last night, but did notice that a local bloke was burning under a small patch of native on his block so it could have been that. In fact the worst smoke I have noticed so far on this side of the Tamar this year has been the VIC smoke.

Of course, I do expect more now that the permit season has ended, but still reckon it will be really quiet compared to previous years.

Posted by Mark Wybourne on 10/04/10 at 08:48 AM

Mark If you read my post you would soon realise I do not profess to know about smoke travel. However, the science based information I pointed you to has been released by people that I am sure know more about this subject than you do.

In regards to this you also state, “...the web site you quote does not give you as much info as the CSMS web site.”
Can I point you to something further. This CSMS site does not give ME any information. It is password protected….go on, have a look at the web site… http://www.fpa.tas.gov.au/index.php?id=csms

Thanks for the acknowledgement that we often get smoke from Victoria. My point was: was this fact conveniently overlooked in the Pulp Mill assessment process?
I think you will find Victorian smoke is overlooked as well under the CSMS.
If you disagree with this (and no doubt you will because if someone says black you say white), then point me to the source of your information. This is something you are not very good at I recall.

The forestry industry spin (that you try to perpetuate) claims every year there is little smoke. You are insulting a lot of people’s intelligence and as long as you keep stating untruths I will keep whinging. Obviously it is having effect so get used to it.

When will the forestry industries accept responsibility for their smoky actions?
Now you want to blame the little burners, or wood heaters, or Victorian smoke, or….??

Posted by Clive Stott on 10/04/10 at 07:51 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Before you submit your comment, please make sure that it complies with Tasmanian Times Code of Conduct.